Re: 64-bit sequences

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Paul Caskey <paul(at)nmxs(dot)com>
Cc: PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 64-bit sequences
Date: 2000-06-24 03:22:31
Message-ID: 39542977.D90592FF@alumni.caltech.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > Mainly it's that int8 isn't supported on all our platforms. As a
> > compile-time option it might be reasonable...

Or maybe better, as another type, say SERIAL64? That way both could be
available on some platforms. Also...

> Similar subject: What about making the oid 64-bit? At first
> glance, this seems easier to change than the sequence generator, since
> you guys do a good job of using sizeof() and the Oid typedef.
> Changing the typedef to "unsigned long long" should cover
> everything...? I will test it.

Again, a 64bit vs 32 bit issue. We have "pass by value" and "pass by
reference" data types, and we have conventionally made everything bigger
than 32bits a "by reference" type. Going to a 64bit OID or SERIAL type
may mess with that convention, but it may be good to revisit this and
remind ourselves why we have that convention in the first place.

Your other questions are related (I think) to the by-ref vs by-val
issue.

- Thomas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-06-24 03:31:20 Re: query failed , don't know why
Previous Message Tatsuo Ishii 2000-06-24 03:22:10 Re: About the pid and opts files